English Amiga Board


Go Back   English Amiga Board > Main > Amiga scene

 
 
Thread Tools
Old 14 August 2002, 14:39   #21
Fred the Fop
flaming faggot
Fred the Fop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Versailles
Age: 49
Posts: 2,802
Un-known..you have your head in the clouds.
I don't expect others to carry my high standards. You want to settle for shit? Go ahead. I'll use my PC for gaming , and my iBook for real and serious computing.
Fred the Fop is offline  
AdSense AdSense  
Old 14 August 2002, 14:57   #22
Mr Creosote
Evil Mastermind
Mr Creosote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 527
Apple lost all the sympathy I had for it when they started not putting floppy drives into their machines anymore - what a bunch of fools

PCs aren't that bad. The business practice to allow different manufacturers was (and still is) the source for its success - and any system will have a hard time competing with that.

As for OSes, MS-DOS is indeed quite good. I 'grew up' on Amiga, MS-DOS and Unix parallel, so I'm used to all of them. And as much as I love GUIs, what I definitely consider a bad OS is something which doesn't give the user the opportunity to work with command lines and have full control over everything! That is exactly what big M did with Windows: make it suitable for idiots (that might be positive), but at the same time take all basic control away from the advanced user. The biggest sin one can commit!

As for Amiga having a chance to re-establish itself - I seriously doubt it, as much as I'd love to see it It would only have a slim chance if it was released with great desktop apps (to balance out the lack of third-party software) and had some huge and established distributor who'd completely switch to Amiga. Which is..... impossible.....
Mr Creosote is offline  
Old 14 August 2002, 14:59   #23
Unknown_K
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Ohio/USA
Age: 49
Posts: 1,379
Send a message via ICQ to Unknown_K
Hmm guess I dont do serious computing then. All the engineering applications that I have used over the last 10+ years that DONT EXIST ON THE MAC AND NEVER WILL must not be serious enough for anybody to even consider. The data aquisition systems that run off of windows must be trash too then, hell if its not made by apple it must be shit.

The point I was making before is that if you want to run legacy hardware with your new hardware and legacy apps with your new apps and have 1000+ companies making hardware and software for your OS expect some problems to happen.

OSX doesnt run everything that ran on classic macos and it sure as hell doesnt support most of the old macos hardware. And the old MACos crashed alot too even with the limited amount of hardware and software available for it.

You cant have it both ways, either limit what hardware and software that can be used or live with bugs and being able to use legacy hardware and software. And basically use the hardware/software that lets you get your specific needs done.. that is often the limiting factor in this world.
Unknown_K is offline  
Old 14 August 2002, 15:33   #24
Fred the Fop
flaming faggot
Fred the Fop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Versailles
Age: 49
Posts: 2,802
I am certain better engineering apps exist on the Mac OS X platform. As we Macers like to say
"Who gives a shit if 30,000 aps are on Windows when the top 5 are on the Mac?"
MS Office on OS X tears the Xp version apart easily. Look at the features in Mac OS IE. Etc, etc.
XP crashed on me a dozen times the past 3 days. Mac OS X? Never in a year of ownership. And thats with tons of apps and downloads installed. The XP is clean and fresh install. Now excuse me as I head to the morning commute and have the PeeCee laptopers gawk and admire at my iBook running OS X as usual. Never fails.

Last edited by Fred the Fop; 14 August 2002 at 15:45.
Fred the Fop is offline  
Old 14 August 2002, 15:41   #25
Fred the Fop
flaming faggot
Fred the Fop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Versailles
Age: 49
Posts: 2,802
In anyway, this is an Amiga future thread, but since we are deviating, I thought Atari ST might get a mention, as it was my fist computer.
I want to inform youse people here that the lowly Gem based Atari TOS is getting a Linux upgrade, a project is ongoing to get it completed. Wish I had the website I saw it on. Anyone know of it?
Fred the Fop is offline  
Old 14 August 2002, 15:45   #26
Unknown_K
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Ohio/USA
Age: 49
Posts: 1,379
Send a message via ICQ to Unknown_K
Linux people want to have Linux OS running on EVERYTHING, somebody will have a Linux kernal for the c64 one of these days

And no Fredrick, engineering selection for mac OSX sucks, and for somebody who hates microsoft you sure love thier office apps for OSX.

Last edited by Unknown_K; 14 August 2002 at 15:50.
Unknown_K is offline  
Old 14 August 2002, 17:42   #27
Fred the Fop
flaming faggot
Fred the Fop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Versailles
Age: 49
Posts: 2,802
Look, I don't want to fight, Un_known. I used to have a seething hatred for Twist long ago on the old AEN booard, beacuse he thought that Nicky Boom wasa cool game. Now he's my buddy. I invite you to visit my human butchering room...come over. Ian and Dpainter and Akira have turned down my offer for some weird reason, though!
Fred the Fop is offline  
Old 14 August 2002, 20:39   #28
Akira
Registered User

Akira's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 18,304
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
There is NO os in the world that lets you run software from a decade ago on new computers and lets you use as much hardware as you can with windows on the intel x86 systems today.
/me boots up AmigaOS and plays a game from 1988
me --->>

I think that point is not quite valid. And I did not grow up with MSDOS machines (THANK GOD!) , but I used them at school everyday and at friends', and I learned them perfectly (wee lad me was). Same goes with unixish flavours. And from them all, I preffer the AmigaOS to any of them.

By the way there are already unixish kernels for the C64 At least two or three! Ask Buzz, he uses LNG.
Akira is offline  
Old 14 August 2002, 21:05   #29
jmmijo
Junior Member
jmmijo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: PDX
Age: 55
Posts: 2,355
Well I guess my $.02 worth aint much but here it goes:

I grew up with CP/M, very cool disk based OS, remember the Kaypro's and Osbourne's anyone

Also messed around at school with the Trash 80's, also a neet micro for it's time. Never really got to mess with the Apple's at all

Then messed with the CBM machines and the Vic20/C64 and the built-in basic was so easy to learn

Then went into the military and cut my teeth on Mini-Comps running Fortran-77 from these massive CDC floor standing hard drive units. Also had the Huge reel-reel tape drives for backups and control from terminal keyboard/monitors. Now these beasts controlled flight simulators, the real ones with full motion and video displays not the micro computer games we see even today

What's the point here, well all of this was CLI based and not a GUI in site. It's the best way to learn about computer technology IMO and not with a GUI. It's like when you first learn to drive a car, you should learn on a stick so that if you ever have to drive one you know how
jmmijo is offline  
Old 14 August 2002, 23:51   #30
Antiriad
The Sacred Armour Of
Antiriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Sussex, UK
Age: 38
Posts: 1,141
Whilst I often dream of "what if?" situations where the Amiga and Atari ST were still active along with the PC and the Mac, i accept that the future is sadly, likely to remain as is.

The Mac is lucky to survive frankly, and its future is by no means secure. Still, you have to admire Apple for surviving by making the huge leaps necessary to keep up with the monotonous advance of the dreaded PC, the jump from the 68k series to PowerPC and the OS leap from 9 to the more UNIX based OSX are testimant to it.

Unlike any of the owners of the Amiga, particularly CBM.
A read in the following page makes for PAINFUL reading...
http://www.floodgap.com/retrobits/ck...t/history.html

The Amiga and Atari series fundamentally messed up with the A1200 and the Falcon. Neither were the leap ahead of the PC as their illustrious forebearers were.
Antiriad is offline  
Old 15 August 2002, 03:03   #31
Twistin'Ghost
Give up the ghost
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: U$A
Age: 26
Posts: 4,662
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
Windows isnt that bad.
I believe it is.
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
Alot of the companies that made software no longer exist because they could not inovate fast enough.

There is nothing that Microsoft ever released in 1.0 revision that was worth a shit. Netscape was THE internet browser, microsoft first few versions sucked. But netscape started to release buggy crap and microsoft finally made a decent product. Look at wordperfect, owned the world.. but people didnt want a DOS word processor anymore and WP took too long getting a windows version out.. so much for them.
I really get so sick of this broken record. Crediting M$ for innovation when it really came down to a combination of their weaving the browser into the OS, thus establishing IE as the tool for surfing the web to any/every new buyer of a PC, then sealing the deal with proprietary HTML tags that only work with IE. And M$' bullying tactics and buyouts of existing softcos are notorious and well documented - even in the case of NT/2000, which was not even their own technology. I used Netscape back when IE made its big push; the main bugs complained about were when experiencing IE-exclusive tags.
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
There is NO os in the world that lets you run software from a decade ago on new computers and lets you use as much hardware as you can with windows on the intel x86 systems today. The price we pay for this is legacy code,some buggy/crappy drivers, and the occasional system crash.
What a load of rubbish. Not even worth the time it takes to reply to.
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
Sooner or later a new hardware system will come out and the whole PC/OS race will start over again and somebody else will win. Once upon a time CP/M used to be the only game in town.. all things must come to an end, and M$ will fall just like rome did (just hope it doesnt take a 1,000 years).
Not neccesarily. No other OS leader in the past has ever been the run by the richest man on the planet, computers were never the common household and business appliance the way they are now, and never before has such tactics been used by an OS manufacturer to insure its domination of the market. What we are experiencing now with Microsoft is not just another business cycle.
Twistin'Ghost is offline  
Old 15 August 2002, 03:29   #32
Unknown_K
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Ohio/USA
Age: 49
Posts: 1,379
Send a message via ICQ to Unknown_K
Microsoft got to where it is today because of windows 3.1 and the software asociated with it... not because of web browsers for windows 9x that wasnt even created at the time.

I dont credit M$ with alot of innovation, just smart buisiness practices early on. The might not have invented alot of technology but they did have the nack to see where things were going and get there first.

Bundling an office suite was a very smart thing to do early on when everybody was buing each package seperate from different venders. Each with its own interface, some even using dos, not being able to cut from one app and pasting into another etc.

Whats wrong with buying companies out anyway? I do admit strong arming PC makers to only sell their windows product isnt nice, but they didnt start that until they owned the OS market anyway. As far as NT/2000 not being their own technology, well IBM didnt push OS/2 at all so thats IBM's fault by screwing over their own customers.

Proprietary HTML tags.. humm nobody ever put a gun to somebodies head and said to use those tags did they, something in them must have been worth using or nobody would have.

The reason M$ is where its at and Commodore/Amiga is dead is not because of technology.. its marketing. Some companies do it well and others fade into oblivion.
Unknown_K is offline  
Old 15 August 2002, 05:32   #33
Akira
Registered User

Akira's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 18,304
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
Microsoft got to where it is today because of windows 3.1 and the software asociated with it...
Sorry, but Microsoft got where they are today thanks to their (dubious) marketing techniques. NO MERIT in their software. Win3.1 was a load of rubbish, GeoWorks Ensemble was a MUCH BETTER contemporary GUI.

Steve Jobs saw where it was all going and doted the LISA with a graphical interface. YEARS before Bill gates even knew what a Window was.

The innovators were the people of the Palo Alto research center of Xerox. Bill Gates is just an opportunist.

And about bundling an office suite... PLEASE... ClarisWorks on the Apple IIGS. YEARS BEFORE.
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
The reason M$ is where its at and Commodore/Amiga is dead is not because of technology.. its marketing. Some companies do it well and others fade into oblivion.
I see a contradiction here?
Akira is offline  
Old 15 August 2002, 05:38   #34
Akira
Registered User

Akira's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 18,304
Sorry Unk_K, I edited my message 100000 times :P You might want to read it again after you reply!
Akira is offline  
Old 15 August 2002, 05:45   #35
Unknown_K
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Ohio/USA
Age: 49
Posts: 1,379
Send a message via ICQ to Unknown_K
Marketing is the key in buisiness. I used geoworks on the c64, funny what you can do with 64k memory.

Still windows 3.1 on the intel platform is what made M$. The mac with macos should have killed the intel machines but didnt, and the amiga/atarist should have killed the mac on price/performance.


Ok let me make this point 1 more time. I am referring to m$ on the intel architecture. Alot of comanies had great products but nobody bothered to do the same thing M$ did with the IBM PC types. That is what made them rich.


Last edited by Unknown_K; 15 August 2002 at 05:53.
Unknown_K is offline  
Old 15 August 2002, 06:27   #36
Akira
Registered User

Akira's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 18,304
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
Any system that hasnt had new hardware in years is basically dead in the market
Oh boy, my friend. Just read this old message. I don't keep up much with the latest Amiga news, but you are much less informed than me!

I think the Amiga gets new hardware every two or three months at the most, if not more frequently! So your assumption is absolutely wrong.

And I just gave you an example of someone who tried to do the same as Microsoft. GEOWORKS DID. Before Windows 3.11. ON THE X86 PLATFORM. As a matter of fact, Ensemble ran even on an XT while Win3.1 needed a 386 not to crawl.

Ensemble is the evolution of GEOS for the C64. Not the same product.

if yo uneed proof of this, I'll be happy to post ads and reviews with date and comparisons with Windows.
Akira is offline  
Old 15 August 2002, 18:30   #37
Twistin'Ghost
Give up the ghost
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: U$A
Age: 26
Posts: 4,662
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
Microsoft got to where it is today because of windows 3.1 and the software asociated with it... not because of web browsers for windows 9x that wasnt even created at the time.
To begin with, I disagree. There were many steps on the ladder that got M$ where it is today. And those steps are still being added to even now. You cannot credit it to Win3.1 - that version added large chunks to their customer list, but Win95 had a far greater impact. People bought computers just to run Win95. Regardless, I never suggested that my comments on their browser takeover was the pivotal point in M$ domination...you just merged two schools of thought from my message. I was merely covering one aspect in which M$ did not innovate. Unless you think anything in IE broke ground technologically. They certainly weren't the designers of how a browser should look and feel!
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
I dont credit M$ with alot of innovation, just smart buisiness practices early on. The might not have invented alot of technology but they did have the nack to see where things were going and get there first.
That makes no sense. If they didn't invent the technology (in other words, steal someone else's idea and release a buggier version of it bundled into your OS, making it the default by association and making it a bother to replace) then they didn't "get there first". They used an unfair advantage and gained dominance based upon end users' careless acceptance of that which is pre-installed. And I am not just talking browsers.
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
Bundling an office suite was a very smart thing to do early on when everybody was buing each package seperate from different venders. Each with its own interface, some even using dos, not being able to cut from one app and pasting into another etc.
Sorry, but the clipboard pre-dates Windows and Microsoft's implementation into their commercial apps. Yet somehow, every time M$ "gets their first", they get all the glory and called "innovators". No matter how much money M$ has, nor how much power, they can't seem to make one thing happen: creating something from their own ideas.
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
Whats wrong with buying companies out anyway? I do admit strong arming PC makers to only sell their windows product isnt nice, but they didnt start that until they owned the OS market anyway. As far as NT/2000 not being their own technology, well IBM didnt push OS/2 at all so thats IBM's fault by screwing over their own customers.
More hyperbole here. M$ doesn't have to strongarm PC makers to include Windows and they haven't needed to do this for some time. They strongarmed them to include their own apps installed as opposed to their competition. And you seem to think that if a company doesn't satifactorily market their product, another company can claim the technology as their own.
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
Proprietary HTML tags.. humm nobody ever put a gun to somebodies head and said to use those tags did they, something in them must have been worth using or nobody would have.

I expected a better response than this...
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
The reason M$ is where its at and Commodore/Amiga is dead is not because of technology.. its marketing. Some companies do it well and others fade into oblivion.
It used to only be marketing, I agree. Nowadays, it a combination of that and shrewd, smarmy business practices.
Twistin'Ghost is offline  
Old 15 August 2002, 19:19   #38
Bloodwych
Moderator

Bloodwych's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: I'm behind you!
Posts: 3,763
Quote:
Originally posted by Unknown_K
I also think that is the same reason Amiga and mac fans hate the pc.. they just didnt grow up using one and dont use it enough to learn it (thats the reason I dont bother with linux)
Great points - everyone in this discussion has spoken a lot of sense. I'd like to target just why many other system users hate the PC and M$ however. That's why I'm quoting you Unknown, because it leads into my discussion nicely - I'm not picking on you as you've made some great points, just like everyone else!

Personally, I don't think preference for certain machines is all down to the level of familiarity we experience IF you’re a computer nut like me. I didn't grab a PC until 96, but my natural interest in computers meant I knew everything about PC's within a year. MS-DOS, Hardware, troubleshooting, how it's operating system works etc. just as I did with the Amiga, Archimedes, Atari ST and every other computer I've owned.

What I did notice after gaining this knowledge were the differences between the platforms and came to realise which were best without being brainwashed by marketing.

>>(the rest is a cut and paste from a post I made over at EMU-UK, but it seems to have absolute relevance here)<<

My dislike of M$ stems from the fact that they weren’t the innovators and pioneers of unique OS, in fact their products and hardware it ran on were rather crap in comparison to the competition.

Where they were ahead however was in marketing and targeting businesses through productive software, something that was poorly done by M$ competitors. Commodore and Acorn especially were really shite at pushing home there technological and OS advantages (especially in the business world) - read anywhere and it'll tell the same story. M$ simply exposed this weakness and became the best at integrating and then marketing other firms hard work into their own products. Considering these products had to run on PC's, I have to admit they did do a good job achieving this by the time Win 95 (anything before this OS was a joke, but well targeted and marketed) emerged but underneath it was a hell of a lot of code and CPU power disguising what was quite a poor platform overall.

Many of the same features offered by Win 95 already existed prior to it's release on superior hardware with micro (in comparison) kernels, requiring MUCH less resources and CPU power, like the Risc and Amiga OS, initially out back in 87! Due to these OS running very efficiently with the hardware, Workbench could be booted from a 800K floppy whilst Risc OS ran entirely from ROM (zero boot time)!

Overall my anger stems from the fact that M$ and the PC platform will be remembered as THE pioneers of computers and OS by most people. The truth is that inferior hardware and software came through and squashed the pioneering opposition through good marketing.

So it comes down to what you respect more - marketing skills, or innovative computer hardware and software. I respect the latter so I'm always going to have a distaste for M$ being able to successfully push an inferior product to the top back in the early nineties………….

Last edited by Bloodwych; 15 August 2002 at 19:29.
Bloodwych is offline  
Old 15 August 2002, 19:48   #39
Twistin'Ghost
Give up the ghost
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: U$A
Age: 26
Posts: 4,662
Quote:
Originally posted by Bloodwych
So it comes down to what you respect more - marketing skills, or innovative computer hardware and software. I respect the latter so I'm always going to have a distaste for M$ being able to successfully push an inferior product to the top back in the early nineties………….
Beautifully put. Like I tell people at work when they talk about how "brilliant" M$ is for their ability to make money: a whore can make money. I am no more impressed with the biggest whore in the world than the dime store slut on the street corner. I have more respect for substance. And I am not a fanboy for millionaires and billionaires. Praising M$ is like praising sleazy attorneys or car salesmen.
Twistin'Ghost is offline  
Old 15 August 2002, 21:05   #40
jmmijo
Junior Member
jmmijo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: PDX
Age: 55
Posts: 2,355
Hey now Twist, I think car salemen are getting a bum rap from you here
jmmijo is offline  
AdSense AdSense  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wanted: Amiga SAS/C development package lucadip MarketPlace 3 17 March 2011 18:06
An idea for continued games development... using Amiga Galahad/FLT Amiga scene 91 29 December 2010 12:45
Amiga development freehand Retrogaming General Discussion 4 18 April 2010 18:53
Amiga software development tootoid Amiga scene 22 21 March 2007 19:12
Next-gen Amiga development LaundroMat Coders. General 3 05 October 2002 01:30

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 20:18.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Page generated in 0.31655 seconds with 12 queries