Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!csn!boulder!horton.Colorado.EDU!chuj
From: chuj@horton.Colorado.EDU (CHU JEFFREY)
Subject: Re: Atari-To-Amiga Convert Info Source!
Message-ID: <1991Jun24.172215.816@colorado.edu>
Sender: news@colorado.edu (The Daily Planet)
Nntp-Posting-Host: horton.colorado.edu
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
References: <9106231954.AA23332@cwns2.INS.CWRU.Edu> <SCOTT.91Jun23172143@breeze.cs.odu.edu> <1991Jun24.110408.29984@Sugar.NeoSoft.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1991 17:22:15 GMT
Lines: 38

In article <1991Jun24.110408.29984@Sugar.NeoSoft.com> peter@Sugar.NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>In article <SCOTT.91Jun23172143@breeze.cs.odu.edu> scott@cs.odu.edu (Scott D. Yelich) writes:
>
>> MY atari does what I need it to do.
>
>You're satisfied, but have you used a real computer?
>

What do you define as a REAL COMPUTER?  As an ex-AMIGA user, I only
knew the AMIGA as more of a game machine than a serious business machine,
the ST was known for the business applications.  For me the ATARI systems
are more of a real machine than any AMIGA systems.
  
 
>I've been there. I borrowed an IBM clone for a while, then an Atari ST. It's
>called shopping around. The productivity improvement from reliable, efficient,
>and responsive multitasking is amazing.
>
>There really is a basic, fundamental difference between the Amiga and the rest.
>Your arguments make good sense when comparing Ataris and Mac and IBMs, but
>there *is* something better.
>

I wonder how far have you gone in comparing AMIGA machines to others, 
AMIGA Fusion Forty Accelerator board is worse than a 486-25 Performance.
AMIGA flickers quite alot, NTSC standard VGA cards are available to IBM
with non-flicker options.

>And *you* don't have to wait 6 years to find it, like I did.
>-- 
>Peter da Silva.   `-_-'   <peter@sugar.neosoft.com>.
>                   'U`    "Have you hugged your wolf today?"


						Jeff



