home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: nntp.earthlink.net!usenet
- From: psheffield@earthlink.net (Patrick Sheffield)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
- Subject: Re: Amiga Technology is insulting!!y
- Date: 28 Mar 1996 04:52:18 GMT
- Organization: Earthlink Network, Inc.
- Message-ID: <3218.6660T864T2709@earthlink.net>
- References: <4j98t9$3pn@nyx.cs.du.edu>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: psheffield.earthlink.net
- X-Newsreader: THOR 2.22 (Amiga;TCP/IP) *UNREGISTERED*
-
-
- Normally I don't jump into RWARS, I love my Amiga, but I use a Mac every day as
- well, and while it has it's faults, it is a decent machine. However I feel
- Harold is confused a bit.
-
- >haroldk@stack.urc.tue.nl (Harold Klink) writes:
-
- >!) A decent OS - the MacOS is much better than the AmigaOS can ever hope
- >to be
- As operating systems go, I'm afraid that AmigaDOS is much more of an operating
- system and far more extensible. The MacOS is -by design- more of a GUI doing
- double duty as an OS.
-
- >2) Commodities - aren't those kind of like extensions?
- No, they're not. Extensions are more like patches. Commodities have a standard
- control interface thus can be started after boot, removed at any time,
- suspended, etc.
- >3) Non-isometric icons - Uhhh?
- This one I don't get, maybe I missed something in the thread.
-
- >4) Cooperative multitasking is just as "real" as preemptive - both let
- >the cpu share time with other processes.
- No, this is not the case. Cooperative multitasking is BTN, but it is completely
- dependant on the /cooperation/ of all parties involved. It also means that for
- the MacOS, you need to allocate the complete operating environmental ram for
- each application /at/ /time/ /of/ /launch/, instead of working from a system
- pool, this strikes me as a hack (effective, but hardly efficient).
-
- People are always using formatting a floppy as an example, but this is not real-
- world enough. Let's consider something I have to do on a daily basis - Copying
- files. The Mac does not /cooperate/ on this front. When I have to move several
- *gigabytes* around (as I do when dealing with AV files, the Mac is *unusable*
- for upwards of 30 minutes, this is not the case on the Amiga.
-
- >5) Arexx - Applescript is better and better supported.
- Can't say about better, but Arexx ports are fairly universal in the software I
- use, and as for power, Arexx is great.
-
- >6) Real Drive Names - Macs have had real drive names since '84
- So the Mac has a year on the Amiga, just because it came out a year earlier? My
- drives are named Phobos, Deimos, Chronos, Hyperion, Calvin, Hobbes, etc...I
- suppose this is in comparison to PC's...
-
- >7) Draggable screens - limited placement compared to just moving windows
- Yes, but when you have many applications running, as one often does on the
- Amiga, keeping each applications windows on their own screens keeps things
- much more tidy than forcing all windows to open on the same screen.
-
- >8) Unlimited tasks and windows running/open - The Mac isn't even limited
- >by available RAM
- It has been my experience that many applications for the Mac don't work well
- with virtual memory, I generally keep it turned off, thus find the Mac much
- more limiting for the memory problems I indicated under #4 above.
-
- I'm not saying that the Mac doesn't have some nice ideas, how about transparent
- multi-monitor support, the ability to move windows largely off screen (without
- having a large virtual screen like the Amiga does it), intelligent multi-select,
- etc...
-
- Personally I think Amiga users and Mac users have a lot in common, like the fact
- that Mac appears to be heading to where the Amiga is now (completely eclipsed by
- the incredible bulk of crap that is Wintel...
-
- My opinions...
-
- Patrick Sheffield
-
-