Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Hardware Issues and discussion => Topic started by: DoomMaster on October 01, 2003, 04:13:44 AM
-
Which platform do you honestly think is a better system and why, the Amiga 2000HD or the Atari Mega4 ST? Please, keep in mind that we are only comparing these two great computers. :-D
-
Wow, How Retro!
This is new, a Retro argument.
-
Hi Argo :hammer:
-
This must be what they mean by "an old flame".
...
Considering where we are, can there be much doubt about the opinion...
-
Couldn't we just look this up in the archive of comp.sys.amiga.advocacy.
-
What is an Atari Mega4 ST computer???? :-?
Don't know if anything out there can beat the Amiga 2000HD Professional Computer though. :-D :-D It's not like the toy Amiga 1200. :-D
-
I prefer Amiga OS, Atari felt too clunky to me.
It seems faster to do things the Amiga way.
My Atari took forever to boot as well.
The toaster works on A2000 too.
-
I would say, for anything graphic, video, multi media etc... 2000HD, no doubt. Audio, midi etc... probably the Atari. I never owned one so I'm just going by what a friend of mine was doing with his Atari. It is possible to do more or less the same on a 2000 but not "out of the box". I would have to say though that the Atari was not nearly as professional as the Amiga 2000HD, definitely looks more like a toy.
:-)
-
I was forced to use Ataris in school. I never used a Mega4 ST, but never liked TOS at all. Hated it, in fact, so based on that I can safely say I prefered the 2000HD (which I owned for several years).
-
Hey Doomy! Where has your mil-spec helmet gone? I liked that avatar :-(
Atari for cubase
Amiga for everything else
PC for internet (not for long :-) )
-
Hi All
sorry for the semi-OT but:
Yesterday i've downloaded an A3000 schematics/user manual archive.
In the first manual page was written: "The new A3000 . . .a cheap alternative to the A2500 system".
Sound strange to me that a machine with in-built SCSI, newer design and higher performances, was sold as "cheap alternative".
Ciao
-
Although I never owned an ST myself, my brother in law still has one (a 1040Ste with 60 MB megadrive). As he stil doesn't understand computers at all, I had quite a good chance to take a look around.
I never liked the OS. Slow, no multitasking, small harddiskpartitions (about 16 MB max or so). I admit there are possibly newer & better versions of the OS for the ST right now, but that particular version of the Atari's OS did not even compare nicely to the Amiga's 1.x versions of WB/KS...
What I _did_ like was the nice black & white picture, the internal PSU and the ability to read/write pc-disks.
All in all, I prefer the A2000 for the better OS (even with 1.x), the great expandability without resorting to band-aids & paperclips to get it functional and the more practical housing it comes in...
-
mega st atari thingie, yes....i remember chunked it in the trash. i don't throw my amigas in the trash even if they are considered trash.NO WAIT! ...................yes that right, ok continue.
-
Oh no... Atari vs. Amiga threads...
-
Back in the 8-bit days (C=64 vs Atari 8 bit like the 800XL) I was an avid Atari fan with Commodore being the 'arch-rival'. Back in those days the comparisons/competitions were close between the two machines.
When the 16-bit giants entered I balked at the Atari's offering...the Amiga wiped the floor with it. Undeniable to even a devout Atari fan (and C= basher, back then) like myself.
The OSes, as mentioned, were worlds apart in fluidity with TOS being a kludgey, non-multitasking nightmare compared to Workbench.
The Amiga's OCS/ECS chipsets delivered rich 4,096 color HAM graphics as opposed to the ST's feeble 16.
The only advantage the ST had in my opinion was the inexpensive 1040 and 520 ST models which were (at least before the release of the Amiga 500) far cheaper than the A1000.
Arguably, this made those little machines ideal for the music field, being inexpensive and coming with MIDI as standard ports.
The MegaST was Atari's attempt at big boxing these machines, and in my opinion, was not anywhere near as usefull as the A2000 was at it's time (which in a sense, was a big box version of the A500).
The higher clockrate (8MHz vs the A500/A2000's 7.14MHz) 68000 did little to improve software performance.
Finally, the A2000 is a far more expandable machine as well. If you really juiced it out, you could have an 060, SCSI, graphics card, ethernet, and even USB onboard. I'd like to see an Atari MegaST come anywhere close to those specs...even the Atari Falcon only made it to the 030 cpu, and I think only the ST clone Hades is the only 060 based Atari compatible out there. Correct me if I'm wrong, I don't know a heck of alot about the ST line of Atari computers.
-
I quite liked Atari ST. Although for me, the sound output was a bit tinny compared to Amiga's Paula! :-)
Is it possible to emulate an Atari ST on Amiga?
-
Is it possible to emulate an Atari ST on Amiga?
Yes...but I've had no luck so far with any of the emulators I've tried due to the fact that aside from the Falcon series (and Hades 060 clones) the Atari ST line never made it past the 68000 cpu - where as an accelerated Amiga chokes either the emulators or the TOS (I can't recall which is the case).
Even trying to get the ST Emulators to run under UAE as a plain A500 I've had no luck.
There were also a few hardware based ST emulators if I remember correctly too, but these probably would be really difficult to find secondhand.
-
Neither there both crap. :-o :-o only joking :-D
I had an atari 520stfm once it was faster than an a500 but was crap for ram upgrades and sound was not as good.I liked it though and micrprose grand prix was faster on the atari than the amiga and the graphics were the same.
There both great machines . :-)
-
Zadoc wrote:
Is it possible to emulate an Atari ST on Amiga?
Yes...but I've had no luck so far with any of the emulators I've tried due to the fact that aside from the Falcon series (and Hades 060 clones) the Atari ST line never made it past the 68000 cpu - where as an accelerated Amiga chokes either the emulators or the TOS (I can't recall which is the case).
Even trying to get the ST Emulators to run under UAE as a plain A500 I've had no luck.
There were also a few hardware based ST emulators if I remember correctly too, but these probably would be really difficult to find secondhand.
So is there any ST emus (programs) about that can be downloaded for the Amiga? I have seen a few ST hacks on Aminet net but that isn't what i was looking for. I have used some ST emus on PC but it would be interesting to see if there are any about. Surely it is possible, they share the same processors, like the MAC and that gets emulated.
I would like to see some of the games that were made both for the ST and Amiga to see how they compare. Especially some of the earlier games. I think that Stunt Car Racer made for the ST was a that little bit faster than the Amiga version due to the slighty better processor. Well, anything before A1200, A3000 and A4000!
-
amiga 500=7.14mhz
atari 520stfm=8mhz
Atari fans should try this site http://www.atari.org/ (http://www.atari.org/) :-)
-
The higher clockrate (8MHz vs the A500/A2000's 7.14MHz) 68000 did little to improve software performance.
Indeed, the sound chip IMO was terrible compared to the mighty Paula and that tiny bit of extra CPU time was not gonna make the difference when you started using sampled sounds, that took CPU time. The C64 even had things the ST didnt, eg: hardware scrolling .
I had an STE for a very short time, never liked it, glad i got rid of it.
-edit errr oh umm be quiet Calen :-)
-
Calen wrote:
The higher clockrate (8MHz vs the A500/A2000's 7.14MHz) 68000 did little to improve software performance.
Indeed, the sound chip IMO was terrible compared to the mighty Paula and that tiny bit of extra CPU time was not gonna make the difference when you started using sampled sounds, that took CPU time. The C64 even had things the ST didnt, eg: hardware scrolling .
I had an STE for a very short time, never liked it, glad i got rid of it.
-edit errr oh umm be quiet Calen :-)
Apart from the sound, the ST wasn't really all that bad. The games between the ST and Amiga were comparable and similar. Maybe the ST would have been better off with the SID chip! Didn't the ST use the same sound chip as the one found in a ZX Spectrum 128k?
-
A GREAT PHILOSEPHER ONCE TRULY SAID "THE ST WAS A POOR MANS AMIGA"
-
The games between the ST and Amiga were comparable and similar.
This is partly because when the ST and the Amiga first hit the market, games were usually written on the ST and then ported to the Amiga.
The Amiga's graphics capabilities were far better than what the ST could produce. Had the games been coded specifically for each machine, we'd have seen a greater difference.
Back to expandability again, another Atari ST shortcoming was a barrier of 4Mb of RAM on the 520/1040ST as opposed to the 8Mb possible on the A500...Not that many games ever tackled that much RAM, but another superiority in the Amiga's corner.
-
@Zadoc
8MB max ???
Nononno ........
1MB internal if you played by the rules (512k chip,512k slow), +8MB external.
With a bit of hacking you could get 2MB chip 8 fast and ~1.8 slow, summing
up to nearly 12MB (with the standard 68000).
Max for A3000/4000 is 1818MB btw,but you just won't find any cards to
stick that onto.. :-x
-
With a bit of hacking you could get 2MB chip 8 fast and ~1.8 slow, summing
up to nearly 12MB (with the standard 68000).
Well, I did mean with a memory expansion. My GVP SCSI sidecar has some SIMM slots in it that accomodates up to 8Mb.
I haven't heard of a possible way to expand a 520/1040 ST (comparible to the A500's case) past 4Mb.
-
@Zadoc
Yes,but that would still add up to 9MB,not 8 :-P :-P
-
A GREAT PHILOSEPHER ONCE TRULY SAID "THE ST WAS A POOR MANS AMIGA"
But software was faster on the atari grand prix was definately smoother and faster than it was on an amiga 500 .i gave my st away but it was a nice machine . :-)
-
But software was faster on the atari grand prix was definately smoother and faster than it was on an amiga 500 .i gave my st away but it was a nice machine .
I have played both and your are right but could you run it in 60 hz mode? that made a difference of course, the sound also was alittle better, perhaps less samples on ST to keep frame rate up
Dang i loved that game.
-
Zadoc wrote:
Back in the 8-bit days (C=64 vs Atari 8 bit like the 800XL) I was an avid Atari fan with Commodore being the 'arch-rival'.
Sounds like we were in the same boat. Back then I was a big Atari 8-bit fan.. even started and ran the local Atari Usere' Group. I felt the 64 was garbage :-) cheaply made, but popular with the masses who valued price above quality. When the Mac, Amiga and ST came out... Well the Mac was out because it was too expensive and B&W only. The Amiga had a better OS than the ST, better graphics, was genlockable, and was generally 'cooler' :D no choice... So, I gave up my user group and went Amiga, and took some good-natured ribbing... and gave some.
"nostalgia isn't what it used to be"
-
To Framiga:
In the first manual page was written: "The new A3000 . . .a cheap alternative to the A2500 system".
Sound strange to me that a machine with in-built SCSI, newer design and higher performances, was sold as "cheap alternative".
That is because the Amiga 2500 is actually a much higher quality, better built machine then the Amiga 3000. After the release of the Amiga 2000 Series, Commodore lowered the quality on all Amigas beginning with the Amiga 3000. The awesome Amiga 2000 is the Flagship Amiga computer because of its durability and expandability. As more and more people are realizing just how nice the Amiga 2000 system really is, it is now once again gaining in popularity. I have noticed that people are selling their Amiga 600s, 1200s, and 3000s on eBay and then those same people are turning around and buying an Amiga 2000HD or 2500. The first run Amiga 2000 computers were so nice, in fact, that they even came from the factory with a military spec 68000 processor, military spec custom chips and 2 military spec 8520 ICs. The first run Amiga 2000 keyboards had Cherry keyswitches that were made in Italy and the power supplies were made in Japan. The first run Amiga 2000s also had the higher quality 4-layer motherboards. The revision 6.x motherboards are the lower quality 2-layer boards. The expansion slots on the Amiga 2000 are on the motherboard, just like todays PCs. This is a much better design then having those slots on a daughter-board plugged into the motherboard (like on the Amiga 3000 and 4000 computers). Framiga, have you ever actually looked inside an Amiga 2000, to see how it was built? It is really a very nicely made machine, built like a German Tiger Tank ! :-D
-
Here at my office 3 years ago I had my Amiga 2000 doing animation and video next door to our staff music guy, who channeled all his world class keyboards and synthesizers throught his Atari Mega ST. He even bought a Mac and Composer software, but never even got it out of the box. As far as I know, it's still the sequencer in his home studio.
-
Framiga wrote:
In the first manual page was written: "The new A3000 . . .a cheap alternative to the A2500 system".
Sound strange to me that a machine with in-built SCSI, newer design and higher performances, was sold as "cheap alternative".
I believe the later A2500s came with 68030 and SCSI cards so the performance wouldn't have been too different; up till then the A2500 was marketed as an extreme high-spec professional machine and they probably didn't want the A3000's appeal to be as selective.
Edit: that's high-spec, not mil-spec ;-)
-
The Amiga 6.x mobos work with the GVP G-Force, whereas my 4.4 doesn't :-x (4.3 does but that's another matter).
The first run Amiga 2000s also had the higher quality 4-layer motherboards. The revision 6.x motherboards are the lower quality 2-layer boards
-
Which is better?
it depends......The 2k is HD professional computer, yeah, but... Is the Atari Military Grade computer?
:-D :-D :-D
-
Cu_Amiga Said
Apart from the sound, the ST wasn't really all that bad. The games between the ST and Amiga were comparable and similar. Maybe the ST would have been better off with the SID chip! Didn't the ST use the same sound chip as the one found in a ZX Spectrum 128k?
It was the same one that was in the Amstrad cpc/+ range as I uas a cpc user back in the old days oh and I also used a ST for some time until I got hold of my first Amiga 500 and the rest is history hehe the ST was crap and of story :-D
-
I think the Amiga 500 was a direct response to the Atari ST and the fact that the A1000's limited expandability (compared to the PC XT's slots) (anyone remember the scary zorro 1 add-on case by byte-by-byte)...
The Atari ST originally had a 512 color palette with no BLITTER. The Mega STs added a blitter chip and later the Atari was brought up to 4096 colors at once.. They also had a Dynamic hi-res type mode that let you see all 4096 colors at once.
The thing is they were aimed at different markets. The Amiga was originally aimed at video games and TV style graphics. Atari and Commodore (both at different times headed by Jack Tramiel) were looking to compete against the Macintosh.. Which was aimed at desktop publishing with it's black and white monitor at the time..
Jack Tramiel wanted to make a low cost Mac that everyone could afford that did desktop publishing and music so the ST aka "jackintosh" was born. He tried to get the Amiga away from Commodore but didn't succeed, so he got GEM (with that ugly font) and made an almost clone of the mac desktop. The ST had a monochrome display and when you put a "magic sac" on it with Mac roms could easily emulate a Mac.
They are very different machines. If anyone who knows the amiga "pagestream" lineage, they should know that it original was called "Publishing Partner Professional" and came from the ST platform.
The Amiga didn't have good output or outline fonts till the A3000 and OS2 with outline fonts came around (which was already available thru GEM on Atari making it good for cheap publishing.
The Amiga high res mode was criticized for it's flicker. At the time the ST had a black and white high res monitor aimed at publishing, and color for low end and games.
The amiga could "genlock" and was aimed at video production. Back in those days video wasn't "digital" and required analog video devices..
Seeing the Amiga at the beginning "genlock" with Andy Warhol and Deborah Harry introducing it in New York brought quite a different crowd to the Amiga and set in on a different course to desktop video that was realized with the Toaster.
The ST grew to Amiga like capabilities and they added a multi-tasking version of gem finally. If you compare the ST's OS to Windows 3.1 the ST shines really brightly. It's amazing that GEM didn't beat on Windows on the PC..
They are both unique and it's like comparing apples to oranges. I don't see having a built in midi port helped the ST midi software, with Dr t's being on both platforms and you could plug an internal midi port into your A2000.. Also there is nothing like bars and pipes on the ST..
It's really cool on Windows XP, I can run both OSes on the same machine and the old software through emulators (and several other platforms like 68K Mac and Apple ][GS)
It's like the best of all worlds nowadays with more graphics and sound than all of them ever had before..
-Don
-
@ CU_AMiGA
A GREAT PHILOSEPHER ONCE TRULY SAID "THE ST WAS A POOR MANS AMIGA"
Wise man also say "fix your caps lock".
Also, wise man might drop a hint as to the wonders of a spell checker, but that might be taken the wrong way :-)
-
Try this site to help your spelling .http://dictionary.reference.com/ (http://dictionary.reference.com/)
-
I'm confused, did I wake up today in 1987 or something???
-
I'm confused, did I wake up today in 1987 or something???
yes and this time round the amiga.s going to be better than the pc. :-D :-D
-
Try this site to help your spelling .http://dictionary.reference.com/
Also:
www.dictionary.com (US English)
dictionary.cambridge.org (UK English - they also sell dictionary software for Windows, very good IMO, 11 quid)
-
(http://amiga.org/images/avatar/users/7760.jpg)(http://amiga.org/images/avatar/users/7760.jpg)(http://amiga.org/images/avatar/users/7760.jpg)(http://amiga.org/images/avatar/users/7760.jpg)
[color=0000FF]~DOOM MASTA!~[/color][/b] :-D
-
@ kd7ota
errr, okay
(http://amiga.org/images/avatar/users/1791.gif)
(http://amiga.org/images/avatar/users/1791.gif)
(http://amiga.org/images/avatar/users/1791.gif)
(http://amiga.org/images/avatar/users/1791.gif)
-
How much do Atari ST's normally fetch up to on Ebay then? I might have a search for one! lol
-
@Cyberus
What a lamer.
-
I dont have an atari, so i have to speak for amiga only.
Amiga2000 is a great computer. Created only for professionals, and as a professional, I have 5x A2000 with genlocks.
We also have one to the TV station i work.
The A2000 "overlays" the station logo on the upper left corner of the screen.
It has been animating (yes the logo is animated and in Hi-Res) this logo for 13 years now (since 1990) without a single crash!
I haven't seen any ataris doing that... :-P
-
So there we have it. Out of Amiga and Atari ST, the Amiga is clearly the better mint.