Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!psuvax1!news
From: melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger)
Subject: Re: Amiga OS *IS* state of the art, but the NeXT is better
In-Reply-To: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com's message of 2 Apr 91 16:05:26 GMT
Message-ID: <ibbG+qlf1@cs.psu.edu>
Sender: news@cs.psu.edu (Usenet)
Nntp-Posting-Host: sunws6.sys.cs.psu.edu
Organization: Penn State Computer Science
References: <7827@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> <86aJZ2w164w@ozonebbs.UUCP>
	<igdG0j+d1@cs.psu.edu> <20267@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 91 23:44:49 GMT
Lines: 56


In article <20267@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes:

   That's also why it's not nice to use a machine that uses a 15 MIPS 68040
   as its base model (though in truth, the discontinued 68030 NeXT is the base
   NeXT model).  Software can set higher goals with a higher base processor,
   but it also requires that base processor just to squeak by.  The first 
   generation 64K/4.77MHz 8088 IBM PC, 128K/7.8MHz 68000 Mac, the 256K/7.16MHz
   68000 Amiga 1000, and the 4MB/25MHz 68030 NeXT were each in this category
   for what they were trying to achieve, though they were not all in the same
   computer class (I see three different ones there myself).

Software is the name of the game.  Make it as easy as possible for
developers to write software on your machine.  So what if the first
generation of software is a bit on the slow side.  Slow software is
better than no software.

 
   The basic performance of the 68040 generation NeXT, to the average GUI user
   at least, is on the order of what 2nd generation Amiga users have been 
   enjoying for a long time.  While it won't number crunch faster, an A3000 does
   nearly everything else faster than a 68040 based NeXT.  And you haven't seen
   a 68040 based Amiga yet.

Commodore just got the 030 Amiga 3000 out the door.  I think it will
be a while before we see an 040 machine from you guys, knowing
Commodore's track record.  I suggest skipping the 040 and going
straight to a RISC processor.  Things are going to heat up with
introduction HP's Snake computers.  NeXT year 15 mips isn't going to
seem all that fast, unless your selling it for $2000.

   Or the NeXT.  MOST developers develop for MS-DOS.  A visable percentage are
   developing for MS-Windows as well, and for the Mac.  Standard UNIX, or perhaps
   one of the standard UNIXs, is another growing target.  Amiga has lots of
   development in a few specific areas.  NeXT has the kind of fringe the Amiga
   did in its early days, and some hired guns, which are of course nice, and 
   something I wish C= had had the startup money to afford.  That is an effective,
   if expensive, way to get acceptance for a new system, as long as you can afford
   to pay the big companies and scare away the little guys.

Who has NeXT paid to develop software?  I've heard this before, but no
one is naming names.  Is it just a rumor?  In fact this newgroup is
the only place that I've heard it.  Anyway, NeXT (or Commodore)
doesn't need everyone to develop software for their machine, just a
few good companies(or ones that people recognize :-)) in the necessary
areas like DTP, CAD, accounting, etc.

You would think with over 2 million machines more developers would
support the Amiga.  As of last year, that was half as many as Apple.
That should be enough to make developers look your way.  I think a
Word Perfect 5.0 and a Lotus 123 for the Amiga would sell a lot more
machines.  Commodore can afford to at least pay these guys, if
necessary.

-Mike

