home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.netins.net!usenet
- From: tempest@netins.net
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.hardware,comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.sys.amiga.games,comp.sys.amiga.graphics
- Subject: Re: Why are europeans dumb enough to buy amigas?
- Date: 24 Mar 1996 06:01:09 GMT
- Organization: INS Information Services, Des Moines, IA USA
- Message-ID: <0099FC9D.C9C33059@netins.net>
- References: <1996Mar11.221045@cantva> <1233.6645T1144T27@Th0r.foo.bar> <314D4DFB.2524@aber.ac.uk> <31543cef.961588@news.onramp.net>
- Reply-To: tempest@netins.net
- NNTP-Posting-Host: ins.netins.net
-
- >Funny, but not true. It requires a 386-class processor (ie with MMU)
- >and 4M of RAM, although 8M is the practical limit.
- >
-
- hahaha... Lets see you use a lame 386 system with 4 megs of ram... I would
- love to see that... At least be some what realistic will you.. :)
-
- >The Amiga requires just an Amiga, but the resolution starts at a
- >laughable 640x200x4 colors, and the maximum normal WB screen is
-
- Starts at? What exactly do you mean by starts at? 640x200x4 colors nobody
- uses, why would they when they can use more? Again you are either trying
- your best to be stupid or it comes natural for you.
-
- >640x400x256 colors. It's a joke. No OLE, no Internet, no networking,
-
- Max? Again you are the joke. 640x400? max? No you are clueless to Amiga
- standard resolutions (without gfx card). 800x600 / 724x566 , depending
- on the monitor driver you use, these are the max resoultions with no
- flicker. Higher iwth flicker. With a gfx card however they are the same or
- greater than whatever you use on an ibm (which is using a gfx card lamer)
- Don't show such ignorance.
-
- My Amiga is doing 1280x1024x256 colors, or I can go to 800x600 in 16.7 milion
- colors. These are non-interlace modes.. Take out your graphics card in
- your ibm and tell me how great your resoultion and color is. :)
-
- No internet? No Networking? My Amiga networks and surfs just fine. Again
- you don't have a clue.
-
- >>Oh the subject of Win 95, a couple of points. Plug and Play. HAven't amigas had
- >>basically the same thing for years?
- >
- >Not really. They've had autoconfig. The user still has to mess with
- >setting up the software on the Amiga.
- >
-
- Yes Really!
- You plug hardware in on an AMiga, copy the device driver to the devs directory,
- and you are done.
-
- on ibm you must also copy software to the computer and then fuck with it for
- a week, even plug and pray shit. After this week, if you are lucky, it will
- work. I think Amiga's autoconfig is 100000000x nicer, easier, and hey it works!
-
- Amiga's 10 years ago had better auto config than ibm's have today still. Don't
- even try to compare. Most Plug/Play hardware dont autoconfig, it is a joke.
-
- >>Take the example:
- >>I put a second HD in my machine. Plug in, switch on. Machine sits there. For a whole 5
- >>seconds. Boots, and I go to partition the new drive, at which point it tells me 'drives
- >>have been added / removed from the system' etc. Ok, so it wasnt sure if something had
- >>been added or removed.
- >>Win 95's plug and play requires that you specifically specify the new device, or let
- >>it spend 20 mins or so looking for it (which a m8 of mine did.... it couldnt find his
- >>new HD......)
- >
- >Absolutely false. I recently added a CDROM to my system. I stuck it
- >in, connected it, and turned the machine on. With no interaction on
- >my part, it found the CDROM, and I then saw it as another drive
- >letter. Case closed.
- >
-
- It is not false acorn, half the time someone tries to add hardware that is
- suppose to be worry free plug and play, it takes just as long as it use to, or
- doesnt even work. Adding hardware to ibm's is a joke, even with the failed
- plug and play crap.
-
- >The Amiga series of machines is so much more expensive than PCs that
- >it isn't even funny.
- >
-
- Lets see.. I can get an Amiga 3000 with 060 50mhz processor board for
- about $1600. That is not bad in my book. I consider that very cheap.
- Even if you can get ibm pentiums cheaper, who cares.. they suck. I am
- willing to pay any price to have a quailty computer system without the
- crap you have to put up with on ibm's and mac's. They just don't compare
- to an Amiga.
-
- >offered in Win95 aren't understood by you?
-
- Windows 95 was a failure. It didn't stand up to the claims of microsoft and
- has proven once again how poor their quality is.
-
-